Munz v. Fayram

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding admission of expert’s improper vouching testimony constituted plain error where there was a lack of corroborating evidence
• concluding the trial court committed prejudicial error by allowing the expert witness to testify that “she was not concerned that the child was ‘giving a fictitious story’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).